Blutengelnouta Offline Upload & Sell: Off
|
I'm not too fond of that kind of "bumpy" design of the focus ring. My oldest Minolta SR lens (100/3.5, from the original trio) has it, like the earlier Minolta MC lenses, but I much prefer the later MC/MD design.
As for the focal length and aperture I like to use my Tamron 60/2 on my Sony A7. It is one of the few APS-C lenses I still keep and it fills FF with a ~6-8% crop, and great sharpness across the frame. When shooting macro it completely fills the frame. Being designed for the more demanding APS-C it is also fantastically sharp on FF. With this in mind I'm not particularly interested in the Voigtländer, although I'm sure it's quite a different beast.
Is there any good reason to design a lens with such a deeply recessed front element?
The MP 50 has a similar design, and it obviously reduces the need for a hood, but I would much have preferred a smaller lens with a larger hood that can be stored in reversed position.
....and as I am writing I think I get it, it is probably to make room for the necessary extension of the lens at close focus distances...
My Minolta MD 100/4 macro has the same design, and also the older 50mm macro I believe. The front element does not extend in the recession however, it's the barrel that extends and becomes about x2 in length. The recession does serve as pretty good protection from accidents at closer distances though. There are probably reasons for it that I'm not aware of though.
|